Why have you blanked your page? I hope I did not cause offense. It is true we have a serious disagreement about the material from Casey 2014, but your input at the informal mediation is important. Cheers - Ret.Prof (talk) 14:46, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ret.Prof, please don't read anything into my blanking this page, it was just to remove the Retired tag. On other matters, perhaps my style of writing comes across as rather unsympathetic, but it's not intended that way: I don't deliberately set out to upset people (well, not often). PiCo (talk) 14:55, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good to hear. By the way the FCC is on of my favorite hangouts! Next time I am in town I will take you out to dinner to show you there are no hard feelings - Ret.Prof (talk) 15:00, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I had no idea you knew or visited Cambodia! I'll be here till early November - I'm researching Cambodian beliefs and their interrelationship with society. It would be nice to meet and talk. PiCo (talk) 15:06, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Small world ... years since I have been in Cambodia, but I have very fond memories of the FCC and the geckos running up and down the walls! --Rbreen (talk) 21:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well well. We should organise a get-together one of these years. PiCo (talk) 06:57, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NOTADVOCATE, WP:BATTLE, WP:RGW, WP:DISRUPTSIGNS, and WP:IDHT for some arguments to build on in the evidence phase of arbitration. Policy pages carry the greatest weight by far. The other pages can be used to emphasize policy. ArbCom will expect to see clear evidence of disruption in the form of diffs and a remedy to prevent future disruption. I would have an WP:RFC or go to WP:NPOVN (or both) before arbitration. The arbs will want to see multiple attempts at dispute resolution before they agree to take a case, and it is better to be the one initiating them. Ignocrates (talk) 14:47, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ignocrates: Thanks, but I used the wrong word, I should have said mediation. I'm certainly not suggesting arbitration at this stage. PiCo (talk) 03:50, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is at DRN:Gospel of Matthew. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --Guy Macon (talk) 03:47, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Son of man may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• gospel of John]], when the crowd asks what Jesus means by the expression).{{sfn}Hurtado|2005|p=292}} This use of the [[definite article]] ("the son of man" rather than "son of man") is not attested

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:44, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Son of man may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• to the four gospels) is far from settled, and no consensus seems likely.{sfn|Hurtado|2005|p=290}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:30, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello PiCo, I just created my first article ever on Wikipedia: Book of Elchasai, and I would like for you to expand this article as much as possible. I used this site as a reference: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/elchasai.html, but within the site contains many references for sourcing by scholars and church fathers. Perhaps this may give you some interest as this article is around your editing field -- Thnx & Cheers -- JudeccaXIII (talk) 17:49, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ret.Prof has been talking about himself in the first person plural on my talk page. Sorry to bother you with this, but maybe you could find out what's going on with him. He and I are currently incommunicado, and that's probably just as well for now. Ignocrates (talk) 00:52, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I also thought you should be aware of this. It's creepy, no? Ignocrates (talk) 01:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

==

==

No further messages please. And try to remember, behind every funny user-name there's a real and quite possibly vulnerable human being.